Worst Billboard Ever.

Warning: The two fake reporters on this clip are super-annoying, but it only lasts about a minute.


 
Devastating Billboard Fail

Idiotic Member of the Georgia Delegation of the Day

It's Paul Broun again!

Paul Broun was apparently "live-tweeting" the State of the Union Address. (Live-Twittering?)

Here is one of his "Tweets"

Mr. President, you don't believe in the Constitution. You believe in socialism. 

7:09 PM Jan 25th via web Retweeted by 100+ people

RepPaulBrounMD

Paul Broun

• © 2011 Twitter

---

 How many ways can one be idiotic in a mere 12 words?

 

Let's start with the idea that the President might actually be taking the time to read a mouth-breathing back-bencher's Twitter feed. Yeah, that seems realistic.

Then there's the "you believe in socialism" nonsense. That hardly seems worth refuting, it's so prima facia absurd. The president who believes in socialism extends the Bush tax-cuts, bails out the auto corporations and uses the SOTU to propose a spending freeze and reduction of corporate tax rates. He believes in socialism like Richard Dawkins believes in Allah.

Then there's this suggestion that somehow the Constitution and socialism are mutually exclusive. I know that to the teabagger mind anything they don't like is unconstitutional, but there is nothing in the Constitution forbidding socialism. If there were we wouldn't have an Interstate Highway system, a Postal Service, or even a military. All those things are funded by taxing the citizenry. Everybody has to pay their share whether or not you ever plan to drive across country or mail a letter or invade a foreign country. That's socialism. Everyone gets the same benefit whether your tax bill comes to $100. or $1,000,000. Even if you didn't earn enough to pay any taxes, the Army will still protect you from the Ruskies, you are welcome to drive on the Interstate, and the Post Office will still bring you your bills and catalogs. How does a member of Congress not understand this?

Bristol Speaks - Or Does She?

Treasury funds Bristol Palin to speak on campus

Updated: January 28, 2011 at 1:50 am | Michael Tabb News Editor

 

Bristol Palin has been selected as keynote speaker for this year’s Sexual Responsibility Week at Washington University.

 

 

Sexual Responsibility! Bristol Palin! Hahahahahahaha!!! 

 Student Union Treasury on Tuesday approved a $20,000 appeal by the Student Health Advisory Committee (SHAC) to sponsor a four-person panel featuring Palin. 

 

 Jeezus Christ, that's a lot of money. For that type of cash, what will Bristol be discussing?

The panel will address the issue of abstinence in a college setting.

 

 

Abstinence in a college setting? Someone who has never attended college and sucks at abstinence is going to be the keynote freakin' speaker at a discussion of abstinence in college? Why not ask her to discuss the difficulties of playing in the NFL, or what it's like to be raised by decent parents?

Why not pay her $20,000 to talk about how to pick the right guy? Or pay her to explain why she named her baby "Tripp" when a: Tripp is not a name and b: the nickname "Tripp" generally is given to someone with a "The third" after his name.

What is she going to say to the audience? "Don't have sex because you might get knocked up like me and then you'd be forced to travel around to various shitty colleges talking about it for $20,000 a pop." 'Cuz I think that's pretty much the extent of her insight into the matter. 

The event will begin with a 25-minute speech by Palin on her life story to be followed by an hour-long panel discussion and a half hour question-and-answer session. A reception will be held after the question and answer to allow students to interact with Palin one-on-one.

 

Of course, the last time someone interacted one-on-one with Bristol, she got pregnant.

And how in the hell can it take 25 minutes to tell her life story? She's what, 20 years old? "First I was a baby, then a little girl, then I got knocked up and went on Dancing With the Stars and Levi's a total butthead!"

Some Treasury members felt that Palin’s speech would spark student interest.
“I know it will fill Graham Chapel, so to me, that’s value in itself,” said Treasury representative Daniel Bernard, a junior. “It brings the student body together in a way that we usually don’t have on this campus.”

I think bringing the student body together is exactly what Bristol is there to warn against!

“One concern I do have when we fund someone like Bristol Palin is, what really are we supporting? And to me it’s someone who is famous because they got pregnant at 18,” said freshman Jacob Trunsky, chair of the Budget Committee.

Now that's just not fair. She was sixteen.

“I understand that people are not going to be happy—this will probably be protested. We really just want to start dialogue and the fact that we’re bringing in a balanced panel should be taken into account,” Elman said. “We’re not just bringing in Bristol Palin, we’re bringing her in with three or four other educated people.”

Oh. Three or four educated people? (Technically not "other educated people") Who else is on the panel?Who are these others who will be providing balance?

The originally scheduled panel included representatives from the Catholic Student Center, Missouri Right to Life, and Planned Parenthood. 

Now that's balance! One speaker from Planned Parenthood, two from the "don't have sex 'cause you might get pregnant" school and one from the "don't have sex 'cause you'll go to hell" academy.

Wow, this whole sex-week abstinence panel just sounds awesome! I just can't wait until. . .

Bristol Palin will not speak at Washington University; SHAC says decision mutual

 

  

Oh, I'm sure the decision was mutual. Just like when my sophomore-year girlfriend broke up with me at the Spring dance, it was mutual. I'm sure that the person who now won't be getting 20 grand for nothing was really okay with this. Heck, it was probably her idea.

Why Isn't This A Bigger Story?

A "Minuteman" leader is on trial for murdering a Mexican family. Why is this not front-page news? Maybe because there's no debate about whether this horrible evil woman is a member of the racist, nativist right-wing? There's no way for the right to plausibly distance themselves from her or claim that she is really a liberal?

"Minutemen" Member on Trial in Murder of Girl, 9

Shawna Forde, Leader of Fringe Militia Group, Accused of Killing Latino Man, Daughter in their Arizona Home

 

(CBS)  TUCSON - A woman went on trail Tuesday in Arizona accused of gunning down a 9-year-old girl and her father in their own home. The story was overshadowed by news of President Obama's big speech and by the other Arizona shooting which has gripped the nation, but it's no less shocking.  

Right, we can't be concerned with actual right-wing violence when there is violent rhetoric to be debated.

 

Here is what her brother has to say about her:

(from the Arizona Star)

Accused ringleader Shawna Forde told her family in recent months that she had begun recruiting members of the Aryan Nations and that she planned to begin robbing drug-cartel leaders, her brother Merrill Metzger said Monday in a telephone interview from Redding, Calif.

"She was talking about starting a revolution against the United States government," he said.

So why is this not a big story? Is it because the narrative has already been decided upon? The narrative that states that these "Minutemen" types, oh sure they may be a little eccentric, but basically, they're just a bunch of America-loving good-ole-boys who aren't hurting anyone, etc. etc. etc. Is that narrative so set in stone that to report on this racist murderer would just be more trouble than it's worth?

Rock And Roll Songs and the Lies I Was Told About Them

When you attend parochial schools as I did for 12 years, you occasionally get to attend presentations on the various evils lurking in the lyrics of popular music. Here is a list of some of the incorrect information that was contained in some of those presentations.



Suicide Solution, Ozzy Ozbourne

    I was told that this song was encouraging the listener to commit suicide as a solution to all of life's problems. Which I could see someone inferring from the title, but why not take a look at what the lyrics actually say? If anything, the song seems to be a warning about the dangers of alcohol.

Wine is fine
But whiskey's quicker
Suicide is slow with liquor
Take a bottle drain your sorrows
THEN IT FLOODS AWAY TOMMOROW!

Hey, Jude, The Beatles.

I was told that in the song "Hey, Jude," Paul McCartney is advising Jude to use heroin. Apparently the phrase "Let her under your skin" and "let her into your heart" were supposed to refer to injecting heroin under one's skin and into one's bloodstream.

Hey Jude, don't be afraid
You were made to go out and get her
The minute you let her under your skin
Then you begin to make it better

Sure, obviously that's about heroin. What else could it possibly be about? Meeting a nice girl and falling in love? Don't be so naive!

Beast of Burden, The Rolling Stones.

   I was told that this song is about sado-masochism. Which one could buy if one looked at the title and did not read any of the lyrics. They could have just said that this was a very naughty song because it contains pleas for S-E-X, but no, they went with the S&M lie. Why? I don't know why.

I'll never be your beast of burden
My back is broad but it's a hurting
All I want is for you to make love to me
I'll never be your beast of burden
I've walked for miles my feet are hurting
All I want is for you to make love to me

Dog Eat Dog, Adam and the Ants.

   I was told that the term "dog eat dog" was a slang term for two men blowing each other. (I'm sure the guy didn't use those words, but it eas something like that.) Aaaaanyway, that may be true. "Dog eat dog" may very well be a slang term for oral sex, but the song has absolutely nothing to do with sex of any type. Not that Adam + the Ants didn't have some risque' songs (Whip in My Valise, Strip) but this wasn't one of them. You can see the lyrics here. Maybe you can make sense of them. I have no idea what the song is about, but it's not about blowjobs.


Bridge Over Troubled Water, Simon and Garfunkle

   I was told that the "bridge" in this song referred to heroin, which Simon & Garfunkle were advocating as a way to get over the "troubled waters" of  life. Seriously. This verse:

Sail on Silver Girl,
Sail on by
Your time has come to shine
All your dreams are on their way

was supposed to be especially incriminating, as the "silver girl"  was a syringe. Really. That's really what I was told.

Bonus: these two did not come from a parochial school presentation, but from a book I stumbled onto in a public library. The book was about songs which promote drug use. Two of the songs were "Heroin" by the Velvet Underground and "White Lines" by Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five. If one is not familiar with these songs, one might guess from their titles that they would be songs about how awesome drugs are. But if one has ever heard the lyrics to either song, that really could not be further from the truth.

Ticket to ride, white line highway
Tell all your friends, they can go my way
Pay your toll, sell your soul
Pound for pound costs more than gold
The longer you stay, the more you pay
My white lines go a long way
Either up your nose or through your vein
With nothin to gain except killin’ your brain

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for cocaine use.

I have made the big decision
I'm gonna try to nullify my life
'Cause when the blood begins to flow
When it shoots up the dropper's neck
When I'm closing in on death
And you can't help me not, you guys
And all you sweet girls with all your sweet talk
You can all go take a walk

Does that make you want to go shoot heroin?

Now I’m broke and it’s no joke
It’s hard as hell to fight it, don’t buy it!

Could that be a more explicit anti-drug lyric?

Anyway, I'm not sure what the point of all this was. I had a point when I started this post, but I don't remember what. I guess the main takeaway would be that I got lied to a lot in parochial school, and I don't really get why.